Serial Killers in 1960s to 80s?

My personal opinion is that it would be way more difficult to evade capture now in the 2020s than in the 1970s. There are cameras everywhere now. There is DNA evidence now, and it takes a very tiny amount in order to find a DNA match. Everyone has a camera and a phone and so there are very few opportunities where people are in the middle of nowhere, cut off from the world where it would easy to be victimized. last but not least, with cell phones, the phones ping the towers and that would help police catch the killers.

I think that the reasons I gave above would make someone think twice about committing multiple killings, and even if they wanted to, they would commit one and be caught before they could commit a bunch more.

@jca2 the thing is that the same was all the way before 1960s. Yet serial killers not always but often werent as close to each in terms of time of being active killers and often were less brutal (but thats not always the case ofcourse). I mean in 1960s you have Zodiac killer, Boston strangler and few more. In 1970s you had Ted Bundy, John Wayne Gacy, Freeway killer and also many more, in 1980s Jeffrey Dahmer, and for example from my country Mariusz Trynkiewicz. The times before 60s and after 80s are way more silent in terms of serial killers

Anything prior to around 2000, there were no phones, no cameras, no video everywhere like there is now. Add to my post that there are doorbell cameras now (Ring for example), so when there’s some crime committed, the police ask neighbors to check their doorbell cameras. My point was that now it would be easier for a serial killer to be caught. These things I mentioned have just been in the last 10 or 20 years (the proliferation of cameras everywhere, cell phones, etc.).

If you don’t agree, that’s ok. I just gave my thoughts. I’m not claiming to be an expert on the subject so I may be totally incorrect.

@koxufoxu It’s generally credited to urbanization, proximity and anonymity.
There have always been serial killers back to Nero but the 70s-80s are considered the ‘golden age of serial killers )

@Koxufoxu This doesn’t answer your question, but I was curious about the serial killer you mentioned in your country, so I read about Trynkiewicz on Wikipedia.

On 29 September 1989 Trynkiewicz was sentenced to four death sentences for every murder. In the same year, after the amnesty, the term was changed to 25 years imprisonment. On 11 February 2014 he was released. On 3 March 2014 by a court decision it was decided to isolate him at the resort Gostynin.

Is your government freakin’ crazy?! They sentence him to death, convert his sentence to 25 years in prison, and when they release! him, they “isolate” him in a town with a population of 19,000 citizens!!

“Hey criminals! Move to Poland!”

@smudges yes it was crazy I agree. However in 1989 Poland was changing from communist Russian puppet state to free country with it death sentence became illegal so they changed the sentence. Maybe the judge went with his “I am actually not attracted to little boys” thing he was saying back then. He is scary and deranged but intelligent men

@smudges let me Just add that Poland was in very archaic state back then. Polands economy was dying since late 1970s. All the political changes and cultural ones did mess up a lot of things in my country for over a decade

You might want to read this. Some of what they say makes sense if you think about it. Time & opportunity can make all the difference!!!

I agree with @jca2 on cameras, and would add DNA tech in early captures.

@Koxufoxu Your explanations make perfect sense. Luckily you don’t have many serial killers!

Here’s my guess. Before the 60’s it was harder for law enforcement to “connect the dots” and link similar crimes to a single suspect across jurisdictions. In other words in the past there were probably many serial killers whose crimes were never identified as being from a serial killer. As for now, I agree with others that it’s possible they’re being caught faster now, especially with familial DNA from your 2nd cousin you didn’t know existed uploading her DNA into 23-and-me and now you’re on a very short list of suspects.

Maybe the serial killers of yesterday are now the mass shooters of today?

II think that serial killers were smarter and of a higher caliber (and certainly more patient) than the mass shooters of today.

Look them up -

Wayne Williams – Atlanta child killer – 1979–1981
Aileen Wournos (Florida, over two years)
John Wayne Gacy
Cleveland Torso Murderer (several years in the 1930s, never caught)
Ted Bundy
Son of Sam (Berkowitz)
Green River Killer (Gary Ridgway)
Zodiac Killer (never identified)
Boston Strangler (diSalvo)
Hillside Strangler (LA late 1970s)

and many more,

But what they tend to have in common is that:

(a) they planned ahead, didn’t do spur-of-the-moment killing usually

(b) they were patient – their killings were stretched out over months or years (Green River killer, over decades)

(c) usually, but not always, they buried or hid their victims

(d) almost all men – except Aileen Wournos)

(e) Usually not motivated by religion or drugs. These people were clear-eyed killers.

Mass killers today (2023) act on impulse, they don’t plan ahead, like they’re getting a drug rush from the killing. Very uncultured and unsophisticated.

Serial killers don’t exist in my country, ever. Not in any period of time. And considering we are much slower in development than the West, it didn’t seem like it’s just because of technology.

^^ There’s one famous one that’s recent, and a female. In 2004, Le Thanh Van was sentenced to death by an appellate court in Ho Chi Minh City, Vietnam.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/L%C3%AA_Thanh_V%C3%A2n

@smudges yeah, “ever” is a hyperbole. There are serial killers out there. There was one case back in the late 1990s of a guy who posed as a fortune teller to lure women in and killed them brutally. But he is largely unknown now. I have never heard of that woman either. Serial killers seem to be a rare occasion here, and none of them ever achieve notoriety like the killers in the West. I said this as someone who has a fascination with crime as a young age and frequently stole my dad’s newspapers in the 2000s.

To show you how unknown that woman is, contrary to the so-called “famous” status on Wikipedia, googling her name will fill you with tons of articles about a senator with the same name. Only a handful of articles about her show up, and you have to scroll really far for it.

In addition to all the tools that @jca2 mentions, there are a lot more channels of communication. Even in the 1970s, a lot of small police departments didn’t even have fax machines.

There was a serial killer in the Santa Barbara area in the 1970s. It was well known in the area from Buellton to Ventura, but hardly known beyond that.

These days word of a multiple murder can be shared almost instantaneously.

@Mimishu1995 There was no indication that it was hyperbole; I took it as a statement, as I did the sentence afterward. I agree that serial killers are rare in your country, but when I googled her at least 15 articles came up, half in your language. Either her picture or dates of birth/death clued me in that they were about her. But it’s possible that that’s just because my computer recently searched her on Bing.

Could be they are also getting caught faster with so many cameras and phones that keep connected. In the 60’s and 70’s, you didn’t call people all the time to say where you were or where you were going. People go to restaurants and post a picture of their meals. There are camera just about everywhere. In businesses and outside of businesses and in people’s vehicles as they drive through.

Then there is the fact that there are less crowed places and people today betray themselves on social media. They take photos and share for likes or maybe even think that everyone on their Facebook page would think them cool.
And of course, let’s face it. When we all carry our phones we carry trackers. And science has come a long way

My point is maybe serial killers today still exist. They just get caught faster before they can continue. Or maybe there are some really good ones who learned to change their methods of killing so they won’t be linked.
Or they have just all gotten good at hiding the bodies.
Or with todays diet died of heart attack trying to carry off a dead person. LOL

I have noticed lately there are more resolved murders than unresolved.
And of course what someone has stated. They are dumber now.

I looked at British serial killers listed on Wikipedia and most of them did their murdering in the 70’s 80’s and 90’s closely followed by the 00’s. The numbers dropped dramatically in the 10’s. There are no doubt other factors involved but the decade 2010 to 2020 was when DNA profiling began to be used by police in the UK.

@smudges interesting. Here on my side there is nothing about her. It’s really amusing that a killer in Vietnam got more article results in a foreign country than her own country. Maybe if you want to be famous as a serial killer, don’t do it in Vietnam because no one will remember you ~

^^ :D

I discussed this with my daughter and she pointed out that during those years crime was at an all time high and it may have to do with lead poisoning. Violence started to shrink when lead was removed from gas for vehicles. There were also other possible factors, like crop poisoning and toxic waste and I think she said steroids were removed from foods. So I can see all those things causing behavioral changes in society. Though I think drugs still affect society as a whole mentally. Specifically opioids.

As if crime isn’t at an all time high now, or have we just changed its definition?

@snowberry Crime is NOT at an all time high. According to the Pew Research Center, “Both the FBI and BJS data show dramatic declines in U.S. violent and property crime rates since the early 1990s, when crime spiked across much of the nation.”

Please don’t make wild ass statements without data.

^^Yep, exactly!